November 19, 1863 – Lincoln at Gettysburg
Posted on November 19th, 2008 at 7:54 am by CordeiroToday’s media world is one defined by six-second sound bytes. Political orators great, and not so great, give speeches by the dozen on any number of subjects to cheering crowds of the assembled masses. What they say is boiled down to what fits in the news segment between the train wreck and the office shootout as reported by the 24-hour cable channel.
The world notes little and remembers less of what is said by national leaders.
On this day, 145 years ago, two speeches were given at the dedicatory ceremony of Gettysburg National Cemetery. One was given by a man widely renowned as the greatest orator of the time. He was none other than Edward Everett, a former Secretary of State, U.S. Senator, U.S. Representative, Governor of Massachusetts, president of Harvard University, and Vice Presidential candidate. Almost as an afterthought, the President of the United States was also invited to give “dedicatory remarks.”
On the dedicatory day, November 19, Everett’s speech contained 13,607 words and lasted over two hours. After Everett’s oration, and a hymn, Abraham Lincoln rose and gave the following speech:
Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation, so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.
But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate—we can not consecrate—we can not hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced.
It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.
Some times less really is more. This speech was given long before the era of paid speechwriters and TelePrompTers. Lincoln wrote it believing (most likely) that it would be forgotten among all the other speeches he gave. Its doubtful he had much time to give serious thought to his “dedicatory remarks”. His nation was at war with herself. The Gettysburg Address was Lincoln at his oratory best – because what he said was what he truly believed. No coaching. No polling. No focus groups.
It is one speech that I wish was available on video. The closest I can get you is Walt Disney’s “Great Moments With Mr. Lincoln”. Enjoy. (The actual address comes at about 37 seconds into the video)
13 Comments
Leave a comment
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
I love re-reading the Gettysburg Address, it’s one of my favorite speeches from American history. Thanks for posting this today. I how beautiful our language is, but sadly so many don’t use it to its full potential any more.
I just finished reading ‘Team of Rivals’ (great book, btw), and I remember that Lincoln wasn’t even sure his speech had impact; in fact he thought he had failed. The crowd was amazed to silence is all, and Everett was gracious to bestow his compliments the next day. Little did Lincoln know that these words would go down in history as one of the greatest speeches of all time.
If only there were men like Lincoln today….
You obviously have not been reading the mainstream media! You should be singing the praises of Obama since he is basically being made out to be Lincoln part 2. (Now if you havent already heard that, then wipe the coffee you just spewed off your computer screen).
Today Lincoln would be reviled by the press for starting an unjust war leading to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of americans simply to hold together a group of states who wanted to leave the union.
LOL, JE. You’re probably right. Lincoln would be ripped to shreds by today’s left.
The comparisons between Obama and Lincoln are just downright insulting.
The confederacy succeeded before Abraham Lincoln even took office. He has been quoted by saying that if he could save the union without abolishing slavery, he would have done. The media would have recognized his oratory skills and his abilities as a uniter. Especially since the media is based in the north, it would favor Lincoln.
The question becomes (and is an interesting debate by many people smarter on history and politics than I) was it an illegal war?
Did the states not have the right to leave the union as it was a voluntary union? If Obama, as a ‘uniter’ were faced with Alaska leaving the union, would he send troops to force them to stay in the union at the end of a gun? Like it or not, that is what Lincoln did. (Present governments prefer only to use force to take tax monies from individuals since that tends to be alot less messy)
Not only that, Lincoln suspended habeus corpus, and jailed the entire Maryland General Asssembly from passing secessionist resolutions. Of course, Jeff Davis also suspended HC and even declared martial law throughout the south.
One could almost call Lincoln a “Milosevic” for attempting to deny states from leaving the Union like Serbia did with Bosnia, Macedonia, and Kosovo.
The media thought LIncoln was a lanky 2-bit hillbilly, and that abolitionists were freaks and nutjobs.
His party even doubted that he’d win re-election because of the unpopularity of the war.
And yet our nation survived the 2bit hillbilly from Illinois. Yet all he did pales in comparison to the evils of the crazy Texan we have now who is responsible for untold misery to the entire world which can only be repaired by another well spoken Illinoisan. (sarcasm off)
The argument being here is that today’s media would not recognize Lincoln, which I believe not to be true. Whatever you may think about the current media, it actually does analyze things and take them into account.
The argument is that the states constitutionally had no right or power to secede. So leaving the union should not even be a question. That in itself is unconstitutional.
Lincoln would have done everything to preserve the union and keep slaves if necessary, he is quoted saying so. The confederacy seceded before he even got a chance to take office.
Huh?
The media in Lincoln’s day trashed him…to say today’s would do any different (a republican war monger) is laughable.
Yes, he wanted to preserve the union. Again, would the public/media support a president marching into alaska and killing of a large percentage of the population to force them to stay part of a union they do not want to be in? What about if a country leaves the UN? Would it be OK to invade them since saying we no longer want to be part of this treaty would be a violation of the treaty.
The concept of secession was based on the argument of states rights vs federal government. Many scholars argue the founding fathers did not mean for the constitution to be binding to this degree and definitely did not want an overarching federal government to hand down rules to the states (see the Declaration of Independence…it is interesting reading)
The circumstances of war are completely different. In this case we have part of the country seceding. In the other we attack and invade a country that had not attacked us. Secondly, this secession occurred before he even took office.
That is not a true analogy. The United Nations is an alliance among countries, while the United States is a country. If parts of the country were rebelling, which they were, it is the federal government’s responsibility to quell that rebellion. The Confederacy started with the attack at the Battle of Fort Sumter.
I will give you the preamble of the Constitution and that is the only line you need to understand why states could not secede:
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
The Constitution was established to a union, and do what it takes to perfect it. Their intent was clear: the welfare of the nation went above states rights. This is why the Articles of Confederation did not work.
An actual Lincoln quote: “If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong.” Lincoln was always anti-slavery, but also understood the concept of states’ rights. He believed that as long as slavery could be restricted to places where it already existed, it would gradually become extinct. The Nebraska Act propelled more definitive action, thus military involvement to preserve the union. Lincoln knew that ‘a house divided cannot stand’.